Call for mandates
in [Digital Cameras]
|
Prev: 46.8 degrees photos are available for viewing
Next: Pack a Gun to Protect Valuables from Airline Theft or Loss?
From: tony cooper on 4 Feb 2010 22:52 On Thu, 04 Feb 2010 21:50:57 -0500, Robert Coe <bob(a)1776.COM> wrote: >On Wed, 03 Feb 2010 15:52:06 -0500, tony cooper <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> >wrote: >: On Wed, 03 Feb 2010 18:14:25 +0000, Bruce <docnews2011(a)gmail.com> >: wrote: >: >: >On Wed, 3 Feb 2010 12:00:22 -0500, "Tim Conway" >: ><tconway_113(a)comcast.net> wrote: >: >> >: >>All that whining and complaining they do sounds like just sour grapes >: >>to me. Look at all the constructive things they could do if they >: >>weren't being so negative. >: > >: > >: >The constructive things they could do? >: >The SI hit a nadir when several participants completely failed to >: >understand the simplest of mandates. But their snapshots were still >: >included, because no-one takes the mandates seriously. >: > >: >: Are we supposed to take the SI seriously? I didn't know that. Here's >: me thinking the SI is just a casual way to put some photos on show in >: an obscure (to the rest of the world of photography) newsgroup. >: >: I mean, how seriously can we take something that is captained by >: someone that goes by the name "Bowser"? What kind of downtown >: competition has entries by a Savage Duck? At least we're not led by a >: "Bruce" (snigger) >: >: If this is a serious competition, where are the cash prizes? The gold >: medals? The laurel wreaths? > >Hasn't Bowser been sending you your laurel wreaths? I've received all those >that I was entitled to. Possibly yours were intercepted because Florida has >agricultural inspections at its borders to keep out boll weevils and spruce >budworms. > He may have tried to hand deliver my laurel wreath, but they put him in quarantine at the border along with Fido, Spot, and Rags. -- Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
From: nate bishop on 22 Feb 2010 02:22 On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 23:13:05 -0600, John Turco <jtur(a)concentric.net> wrote: >John McWilliams wrote: >> >> tony cooper wrote: >> > On Wed, 03 Feb 2010 08:26:55 -0800, John McWilliams >> > <jpmcw(a)comcast.net> wrote: >> > >> >> Bruce wrote: >> >>> On Tue, 02 Feb 2010 18:44:53 -0500, Robert Coe <bob(a)1776.COM> wrote: >> >>> >> >>>> On Fri, 29 Jan 2010 16:02:26 +0000, Bruce <docnews2011(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>> : >> >>>> : I'm really being very gentle here, because the execrable SI is >> >>>> : actually a gross insult to capable photographers. >> >>>> >> >>>> You don't say. Can you actually cite any capable photographers who think >> >>>> they've been insulted? >> >>> >> >>> There is quite a long list of capable photographers who participated >> >>> in the early days of the SI. They left both the SI and the SI's >> >>> sponsoring newsgroup, never to return. >> >> All kinds of capable photogs have left NGs right and left, as well as >> >> canning usenet altogether. >> > >> > Some of which, undoubtedly, left due to a severe case of death. >> >> Yes, many of which were fatal! >> >> Not many replacements, either, so unless there's some event I cannot >> forsee, usenet will continue to dwindle. Until it, too, catches the >> death badly enough. >> >> Film at eleven. > > >Ron Hunter is this newsgroup's (news:rec.photo.digital) all-time leading >poster, with 15,003 articles. Alas, he seemingly abandoned r.p.d., during >July of 2009. > >As I recall, he mentioned the sudden death of his brother, at 77; I'd >guessed that his grief was too much to overcome. (Ron's own age is 64 >or so, as I believe he wrote publicly.) > >Nevertheless, Ron is still rather active within Usenet, itself. Boasting >a grand total amounting to 37,389 messages, he's been concentrating his >attention on "mozilla.support" groups, lately. > >Rod Hunter's current statistics (as of February 21, 2010): > > 420 groups > > All - 37,389 (Dec. 2001 - Feb. 2010) > > rec.photo.digital - 15,003 (Jan. 2002 - July 2009) > >Another familiar r.p.d. member ("ASAAR") has left Usenet altogether, >apparently. His final post was on August 22, 2009, in the "Battery >question" thread. > >ASAAR's past stats: > > 146 groups > > All - 11,128 (Dec 2004 - Aug. 2009) > > rec.photo.digital - 8,342 (Mar. 2005 - Aug. 2009) > >Sadly, there is one confirmed death. "Blinky the Shark" was a very >prodigious Usenet contributor, who died on January 31, 2009, at the >age of 61. > >My subsequent Google research revealed he'd begun complaining of >flu-like symptoms, within some of his closing articles. Eventually, >I'd gathered that a heart attack may have been the immediate cause >of his tragic demise. > >Blinky the Shark's real name was Lee Rizor (1947-2009). > >Blinky's final r�sum�: > > 341 groups > > All - 93,112 (June 2001 - Jan. 2009) > > rec.photo.digital - 595 (Oct. 2005; Nov. 2007; Jan. 2008 - Jan. 2009) What a fine tribute to computer-chair and armchair role-playing experts. Outsitting in their fields of imaginary expertise!
From: Allen on 22 Feb 2010 16:11 On 2/21/2010 11:13 PM, John Turco wrote: > John McWilliams wrote: >> >> tony cooper wrote: >>> On Wed, 03 Feb 2010 08:26:55 -0800, John McWilliams >>> <jpmcw(a)comcast.net> wrote: >>> >>>> Bruce wrote: >>>>> On Tue, 02 Feb 2010 18:44:53 -0500, Robert Coe<bob(a)1776.COM> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, 29 Jan 2010 16:02:26 +0000, Bruce<docnews2011(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> : >>>>>> : I'm really being very gentle here, because the execrable SI is >>>>>> : actually a gross insult to capable photographers. >>>>>> >>>>>> You don't say. Can you actually cite any capable photographers who think >>>>>> they've been insulted? >>>>> >>>>> There is quite a long list of capable photographers who participated >>>>> in the early days of the SI. They left both the SI and the SI's >>>>> sponsoring newsgroup, never to return. >>>> All kinds of capable photogs have left NGs right and left, as well as >>>> canning usenet altogether. >>> >>> Some of which, undoubtedly, left due to a severe case of death. >> >> Yes, many of which were fatal! >> >> Not many replacements, either, so unless there's some event I cannot >> forsee, usenet will continue to dwindle. Until it, too, catches the >> death badly enough. >> >> Film at eleven. > > > Ron Hunter is this newsgroup's (news:rec.photo.digital) all-time leading > poster, with 15,003 articles. Alas, he seemingly abandoned r.p.d., during > July of 2009. > > As I recall, he mentioned the sudden death of his brother, at 77; I'd > guessed that his grief was too much to overcome. (Ron's own age is 64 > or so, as I believe he wrote publicly.) > > Nevertheless, Ron is still rather active within Usenet, itself. Boasting > a grand total amounting to 37,389 messages, he's been concentrating his > attention on "mozilla.support" groups, lately. > > Rod Hunter's current statistics (as of February 21, 2010): > > 420 groups > > All - 37,389 (Dec. 2001 - Feb. 2010) > > rec.photo.digital - 15,003 (Jan. 2002 - July 2009) > > Another familiar r.p.d. member ("ASAAR") has left Usenet altogether, > apparently. His final post was on August 22, 2009, in the "Battery > question" thread. > > ASAAR's past stats: > > 146 groups > > All - 11,128 (Dec 2004 - Aug. 2009) > > rec.photo.digital - 8,342 (Mar. 2005 - Aug. 2009) > > Sadly, there is one confirmed death. "Blinky the Shark" was a very > prodigious Usenet contributor, who died on January 31, 2009, at the > age of 61. > > My subsequent Google research revealed he'd begun complaining of > flu-like symptoms, within some of his closing articles. Eventually, > I'd gathered that a heart attack may have been the immediate cause > of his tragic demise. > > Blinky the Shark's real name was Lee Rizor (1947-2009). > > Blinky's final r�sum�: > > 341 groups > > All - 93,112 (June 2001 - Jan. 2009) > > rec.photo.digital - 595 (Oct. 2005; Nov. 2007; Jan. 2008 - Jan. 2009) > Hunter is an extremely valuable contributor to the Mozilla groups. Allen
From: Allen on 22 Feb 2010 16:12 On 2/22/2010 1:22 AM, nate bishop wrote:> > What a fine tribute to computer-chair and armchair role-playing experts. > Outsitting in their fields of imaginary expertise! > Goodbye, nate.
From: Geoff G on 22 Feb 2010 17:58
On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 15:11:23 -0600, Allen <allent(a)austin.rr.com> wrote: >On 2/21/2010 11:13 PM, John Turco wrote: >> John McWilliams wrote: >>> >>> tony cooper wrote: >>>> On Wed, 03 Feb 2010 08:26:55 -0800, John McWilliams >>>> <jpmcw(a)comcast.net> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Bruce wrote: >>>>>> On Tue, 02 Feb 2010 18:44:53 -0500, Robert Coe<bob(a)1776.COM> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Fri, 29 Jan 2010 16:02:26 +0000, Bruce<docnews2011(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> : >>>>>>> : I'm really being very gentle here, because the execrable SI is >>>>>>> : actually a gross insult to capable photographers. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> You don't say. Can you actually cite any capable photographers who think >>>>>>> they've been insulted? >>>>>> >>>>>> There is quite a long list of capable photographers who participated >>>>>> in the early days of the SI. They left both the SI and the SI's >>>>>> sponsoring newsgroup, never to return. >>>>> All kinds of capable photogs have left NGs right and left, as well as >>>>> canning usenet altogether. >>>> >>>> Some of which, undoubtedly, left due to a severe case of death. >>> >>> Yes, many of which were fatal! >>> >>> Not many replacements, either, so unless there's some event I cannot >>> forsee, usenet will continue to dwindle. Until it, too, catches the >>> death badly enough. >>> >>> Film at eleven. >> >> >> Ron Hunter is this newsgroup's (news:rec.photo.digital) all-time leading >> poster, with 15,003 articles. Alas, he seemingly abandoned r.p.d., during >> July of 2009. >> >> As I recall, he mentioned the sudden death of his brother, at 77; I'd >> guessed that his grief was too much to overcome. (Ron's own age is 64 >> or so, as I believe he wrote publicly.) >> >> Nevertheless, Ron is still rather active within Usenet, itself. Boasting >> a grand total amounting to 37,389 messages, he's been concentrating his >> attention on "mozilla.support" groups, lately. >> >> Rod Hunter's current statistics (as of February 21, 2010): >> >> 420 groups >> >> All - 37,389 (Dec. 2001 - Feb. 2010) >> >> rec.photo.digital - 15,003 (Jan. 2002 - July 2009) >> >> Another familiar r.p.d. member ("ASAAR") has left Usenet altogether, >> apparently. His final post was on August 22, 2009, in the "Battery >> question" thread. >> >> ASAAR's past stats: >> >> 146 groups >> >> All - 11,128 (Dec 2004 - Aug. 2009) >> >> rec.photo.digital - 8,342 (Mar. 2005 - Aug. 2009) >> >> Sadly, there is one confirmed death. "Blinky the Shark" was a very >> prodigious Usenet contributor, who died on January 31, 2009, at the >> age of 61. >> >> My subsequent Google research revealed he'd begun complaining of >> flu-like symptoms, within some of his closing articles. Eventually, >> I'd gathered that a heart attack may have been the immediate cause >> of his tragic demise. >> >> Blinky the Shark's real name was Lee Rizor (1947-2009). >> >> Blinky's final r�sum�: >> >> 341 groups >> >> All - 93,112 (June 2001 - Jan. 2009) >> >> rec.photo.digital - 595 (Oct. 2005; Nov. 2007; Jan. 2008 - Jan. 2009) >> >Hunter is an extremely valuable contributor to the Mozilla groups. >Allen And why would someone like that, who sits at their computer with no real-life experience in anything else but, not have the information needed to run a browser all their life? Are you catching on to what "prolific poster" in any forum topic, one that depends on experiences gained from being away from their computers, really means yet? I've taken a two-year sabbatical from my lifetime of photography expeditions, only to find out how inanely ignorant the "resident experts" are on any forum that depends on experience beyond their keyboards. Now easily discerning what ridiculous answers they can obtain from Google and even believe. Passing off that absurd parroted misinformation again as "truth" for years and years to come. They know no better, they can't, they've never tested these things for themselves in the real world. They are always depending on the most popular and plausible but totally wrong explanations on Google's first one or two pages of hits. Furthering their ignorance and bolstering the most popular answer being the most factual to the psychotics that think popularity of an answer somehow makes it the truth. It only makes it a truth to those with lazy, ignorant, and foolish minds who will accept the first answer that is slightly beyond their comprehension but "sounds good!" Googling for answers armed with inexperience only breeds their own ignorance. Camera manuals too are full of misinformation. All of them authored by techno-geeks who most likely never even used the product other than to take a few snapshots of the pencil-cup and paperclip holder on their desks. I frequently fill up the blank "notes" pages in the back of my camera manuals with many corrections. Should I ever give that camera to another some day. So they won't be left as confused and inept as those who never even realize their manuals are rife with errors. Even worse, these "prolific-posting experts" don't even know how to search for the correct answers. You can't ask a proper valid question about something with which you have zero experience in life. I learn so much more about the level of comprehension someone has by the question they are capable of asking than any statements they might ever make. Only from real-life experience and testing things for yourself will you find out the real truth, from which one can then formulate useful questions to further their understanding. Armed with that experience, only then can you use Google as any kind of effective search engine. But still the answers must be cross-referenced and checked against your own findings. Even if 1000 answers all claim the same thing from Google, your tests might reveal something that all the rest forgot to consider, making all 1000 of their answers in error. But "prolific-posting experts" realize none of this. How can they? That's like asking someone with severe brain-damage to truthfully answer the question, "Do you have brain damage?" They'll never know. They'll defend their answers borne from ignorance to their death. "Prolific online poster" and "expert" are mutually exclusive. Unless that topic is directly dealing with their keyboard and mouse. It's the only thing with which they'll ever have any first-hand expertise in life. Post, post, post you expert role-playing fools. If nothing else, you are an interesting form of entertainment for those with real-life experience who know more than you ever will. This is a bit like Einstein sitting on the fence of a pig-sty and pondering why its inhabitants are doing what they do. A frivolous distraction. Summarized well, from of all places, the story of "Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory". When Mr. Wonka states, "A little nonsense now and then is relished by the wisest of men." One need only read these groups for a few minutes to enjoy an overwhelming amount of nonsense posted by the most prolific-posting, zero-life-experience, "experts" each day. |